the only race lotus shown great pace was bahrain and hungary!! no more than that!!

What was so great in McLaren's race pace in Hockenhaim? Lewis could overtake Alonso on fresh tyres and Button was hunted down by Vetel by the end. Canada? Noting outstanding there. Good strategy.Shanghai? How could they be outstanding since Rosberg had the best pace?In Oz Kimi's pace wasn't any worse from McLaren's.

Lotus had dominant pace in Hungary and Bahrain, but also great in Britain and Spain. Maby Canada but that was diffrent strategy

many experts say RBR and McLaren are the best cars and Lotus and Ferrari not far off, Lotus can be the best when they get their qualifyings work perfectly but overally RBR and McLaren are better/faster cars than Lotus now but all are very close. Lotus has mainly been outstanding on racepace but only on the final stint of the race (except bahrain,valencia and hungary) but other than that they have been on the level of other top cars.

watch hungary, lotus can gain on mclaren on the straights (lack downforce) , but mclaren can regain on s2 and s3 with lots of slow speed corners indicating their strong downforce package!! Same as redbull that dominate valencia (one of the slowest track) indicating their strong aero package!!

the lotus like sauber are design around the tyres~~

Rbr, mclaren are more flexible as while they focus on making the car faster, at the same time they can gain more performance by understanding the tyres.........

What was so great in McLaren's race pace in Hockenhaim? Lewis could overtake Alonso on fresh tyres and Button was hunted down by Vetel by the end. Canada? Noting outstanding there. Good strategy.Shanghai? How could they be outstanding since Rosberg had the best pace?In Oz Kimi's pace wasn't any worse from McLaren's.

Lotus had dominant pace in Hungary and Bahrain, but also great in Britain and Spain. Maby Canada but that was diffrent strategy

Hockeinham - Jenson started on 6th and fight all the way through p2, and if the tyre hadn;t gave up, vettel wouldn't gain on him easily!!

Canada - Lewis did 2 stopper, and on the last stint he strike throught the field and chasing down vettel and fernando to clinch 1st!! (nth outstanding??)

Shanghai - p6 and p7 for both mclaren duo (both ended up as p2 and p3) nth oustanding???

Oz - Np, kimi wasnt matching the pace at the start, he only match them on his last stint

Britain - they only shown the pace on the last stint when everyone 's tyre pretty much went off

Spain - are you serious??? kimi has trouble matching williams and alonso, but he gains the pace on the last stint when alonso and maldonado were on worn out tyres

watch hungary, lotus can gain on mclaren on the straights (lack downforce) , but mclaren can regain on s2 and s3 with lots of slow speed corners indicating their strong downforce package!! Same as redbull that dominate valencia (one of the slowest track) indicating their strong aero package!!

Where were this McLaren's superior downforce at aero demanding Silverstone circuit, or Barcelona? Lotus have plenty of downforce and it is known and repeated many times from the beggining of the season.

the lotus like sauber are design around the tyres~~

Like every other team.

Rbr, mclaren are more flexible as while they focus on making the car faster, at the same time they can gain more performance by understanding the tyres.........

In what this flexibility is expressed? Do you claim that Lotus don't work on understanding the tyres?

Where were this McLaren's superior downforce at aero demanding Silverstone circuit, or Barcelona? Lotus have plenty of downforce and it is known and repeated many times from the beggining of the season.

well, you should ask the team for failing in finding the setup for races!! The differences btw downforce lvl can be spotted in different sectors of the track!! with mclaren and rbr top the chart !!

Like every other team.

sauber and lotus are the only team that able to harness the tyre better

In what this flexibility is expressed? Do you claim that Lotus don't wor on understanding the tyres?

meaning their car was quick, but hindered by tyre so far!! They seems to be better from time to time!! Lotus does need to understand the tyre as well, they can only show great pace in 35 degree celcius to 45 degree celcius!!

i dont really understand how ones could claim lotus as the best car lmao

well, you should ask the team for failing in finding the setup for races!! The differences btw downforce lvl can be spotted in different sectors of the track!! with mclaren and rbr top the chart !!

sauber and lotus are the only team that able to harness the tyre better

meaning their car was quick, but hindered by tyre so far!! They seems to be better from time to time!! Lotus does need to understand the tyre as well, they can only show great pace in 35 degree celcius to 45 degree celcius!!

i dont really understand how ones could claim lotus as the best car lmao

Hungaroring isn't THAT aero demanding.Lots of slows corner, yes. But that menas mechanical grip is gonna matter more than the aeropackage especially for turns like 6,7,8,11,12,13While Silverstone we got Maggots,Becketts,Abbey and Valencia we got turns like 11 or 15,16

well, you should ask the team for failing in finding the setup for races!! The differences btw downforce lvl can be spotted in different sectors of the track!! with mclaren and rbr top the chart !!

McLaren failing to find a good setup on only two aero demanding track that we had up to date that hindered them in showing their great aero numbers is too big of a coinsidence for me to belive. Too far-fetched man.

We can play a little prediction game. How about that? I say that McLaren won't be competitive at Spa, and neither RBR will be (but they will be hanging around). Lotus and Ferrari have the best aero in fast corners so Spa race will be between them. Then in the next race it will be between Lotus and McLaren where Ferrari and RBR will be less competitive. Assuming the races will be dry. What's your take on next two races?

sauber and lotus are the only team that able to harness the tyre better

I have seen many CAD photos of race cars. The biggest challenge is dirty air caused by front tyres. Every team work on that area the most. The most important thing is to find good ratio of tyre behaviour between wind tunnel figures and on track figures.

I remember Maldonado from few months back talking about how Williams built their car around the tyres.

Mercedes sacrifised their resources from aero work in favour fo work on tyres because it's more crucial. You could read it also on Autosport.

meaning their car was quick, but hindered by tyre so far!! They seems to be better from time to time!! Lotus does need to understand the tyre as well, they can only show great pace in 35 degree celcius to 45 degree celcius!!

Allison mentioned in many articles that they have much better understanding of the tyres since beggining of the season. He said that Kimi's tyres failing of a cliff wouldn't happen now. He said that cold condidtions don't hamper them that much now and you could see it in dump Friday conditions at Silverstone.

i dont really understand how ones could claim lotus as the best car lmao

McLaren failing to find a good setup on only two aero demanding track that we had up to date that hindered them in showing their great aero numbers is too big of a coinsidence for me to belive. Too far-fetched man.

We can play a little prediction game. How about that? I say that McLaren won't be competitive at Spa, and neither RBR will be (but they will be hanging around). Lotus and Ferrari have the best aero in fast corners so Spa race will be between them. Then in the next race it will be between Lotus and McLaren where Ferrari and RBR will be less competitive. Assuming the races will be dry. What's your take on next two races?

I'd say if its wet, it will be between rbr and ferrari!! if its dry, rbr, mclaren and lotus will be in contention!!

I have seen many CAD photos of race cars. The biggest challenge is dirty air caused by front tyres. Every team work on that area the most. The most important thing is to find good ratio of tyre behaviour between wind tunnel figures and on track figures.

I remember Maldonado from few months back talking about how Williams built their car around the tyres. Mercedes sacrifised their resources from aero work in favour fo work on tyres because it's more crucial. You could read it also on Autosport.

Yea i read it. But not as fruitful as both lotus and sauber!!

Allison mentioned in many articles that they have much better understanding of the tyres since beggining of the season. He said that Kimi's tyres failing of a cliff wouldn't happen now. He said that cold condidtions don't hamper them that much now and you could see it in dump Friday conditions at Silverstone.

And Allison said they still confuse on the lack of pace in hockeinham wet qualifying!! Apparenlt, its random and the conditions requirement varies!! or you can said their car is extremely sensitive!!

What stopped him from whipping Heidfeld in 2 of their 3 years together then? No top team was even interested in Kubica after his average performance in 2009 (one McLaren seat, one Red Bull seat, two Mercedes seats).

What stopped him from whipping Heidfeld in 2 of their 3 years together then? No top team was even interested in Kubica after his average performance in 2009 (one McLaren seat, one Red Bull seat, two Mercedes seats).

What stopped him from whipping Heidfeld in 2 of their 3 years together then? No top team was even interested in Kubica after his average performance in 2009 (one McLaren seat, one Red Bull seat, two Mercedes seats).

He wiped him in 2008. Then utter crap F1.09 was born. It was so crappy that BMW decided to do a seppuku and pulled out from F1. And I have avatar of it ever since

BTW there are reports that some F1 teams are interested in Kubica even now

What stopped him from whipping Heidfeld in 2 of their 3 years together then? No top team was even interested in Kubica after his average performance in 2009 (one McLaren seat, one Red Bull seat, two Mercedes seats).

So true!! is easy to say what if afterwards~~~!! Hedfield own him easily~~ and yet his age ease attraction from others!!

He wiped him in 2008. Then utter crap F1.09 was born. It was so crappy that BMW decided to do a seppuku and pulled out from F1. And I have avatar of it ever since

Err.. What has car got to do with his relative performance w.r.t. Heidfeld? His 2009 season was so underwhelming that top teams didn't even bother to remember him. The quality of the car does not stop a driver from getting noticed due to the difference a top driver exhibits over his teammate. Nobody (except Kubica fans) was talking about Kubica when there was so much driver-talk at the end of 2009. Kubica had a nice season in 2010 and his accident was one of the worst losses F1 has encountered recently, but dramatizing like Kubica would have conquered the world, wrapped up the championship with races to go, etc. is a bit silly. He had 4 seasons in F1, 2 good ones, 2 bad ones. Far from a consistent top-performer whom you can boast as one who will lead to the wonderland.

Err.. What has car got to do with his relative performance w.r.t. Heidfeld? His 2009 season was so underwhelming that top teams didn't even bother to remember him. The quality of the car does not stop a driver from getting noticed due to the difference a top driver exhibits over his teammate. Nobody (except Kubica fans) was talking about Kubica when there was so much driver-talk at the end of 2009. Kubica had a nice season in 2010 and his accident was one of the worst losses F1 has encountered recently, but dramatizing like Kubica would have conquered the world, wrapped up the championship with races to go, etc. is a bit silly. He had 4 seasons in F1, 2 good ones, 2 bad ones. Far from a consistent top-performer whom you can boast as one who will lead to the wonderland.

As much as I like Kimi , I have to agree with this conclusion.Kimi is quite weak in adapting but bloody fast when the car comes back to him.

Well, we´ll have to deal with that to the end of ages. It´s really funny how tags born. One bad year in a 10 years career, someone decides that constitutes lack of adaptability, a group of people jump on the bandwagon, and there we go, that´s it forever, even if there´s 90% of the career suggesting something totally different.

Kubica had a nice season in 2010 and his accident was one of the worst losses F1 has encountered recently, but dramatizing like Kubica would have conquered the world, wrapped up the championship with races to go, etc. is a bit silly. He had 4 seasons in F1, 2 good ones, 2 bad ones. Far from a consistent top-performer whom you can boast as one who will lead to the wonderland.

Most overrated driver since JPM.

RK had an average 2007, perfect 2008, poor 2009 and good 2010 -is that "lack of adaptability", folks? - . How does that make him on the level of Alonso, Räikkönen, Lewis, or Vettels... I have just no idea. He was more of a Rosberg: we all suspect he´s really good, but there´s not enough evidence yet.

Err.. What has car got to do with his relative performance w.r.t. Heidfeld? His 2009 season was so underwhelming that top teams didn't even bother to remember him. The quality of the car does not stop a driver from getting noticed due to the difference a top driver exhibits over his teammate. Nobody (except Kubica fans) was talking about Kubica when there was so much driver-talk at the end of 2009. Kubica had a nice season in 2010 and his accident was one of the worst losses F1 has encountered recently, but dramatizing like Kubica would have conquered the world, wrapped up the championship with races to go, etc. is a bit silly. He had 4 seasons in F1, 2 good ones, 2 bad ones. Far from a consistent top-performer whom you can boast as one who will lead to the wonderland.

How do you know that? You should change your nick to BSMaster.

yea, you're right! nick own him in 07 with 22 points lead!!

Yes, at the beggining of his carrer. That's a cheap shot, but I didn't really expected better from you. You have to fit also 12 diffrence somewhere there. Good luck.

Well, we´ll have to deal with that to the end of ages. It´s really funny how tags born. One bad year in a 10 years career, someone decides that constitutes lack of adaptability, a group of people jump on the bandwagon, and there we go, that´s it forever, even if there´s 90% of the career suggesting something totally different.

Well, that's the burden of being kimi fan. And it wasn't one season. There was 2009 also.

It was one bad year, as I said up there. Late 2008, early 2009. Even if you want to say both full seasons were bad -which is false-, that leaves you with 8 good seasons, 2 bad ones career wise. Is that the sign of a driver unable to adapt? Really? If you think so, then you either think the grid is full of them, or you have double standards.

It was one bad year, as I said up there. Late 2008, early 2009. Even if you want to say both full seasons were bad -which is false-, that leaves you with 8 good seasons, 2 bad ones career wise. Is that the sign of a driver unable to adapt? Really? If you think so, then you either think the grid is full of them, or you have double standards.

How many good seasons Schumacher had? Doesn't matter because of how he's driving nowadays means he's not a top driver anymore.

How many good seasons Schumacher had? Doesn't matter because of how he's driving nowadays means he's not a top driver anymore.

Actually I do agree Kimi is not a top driver right now -even if he is easily that career wise-, if that´s what you´re implying. That´s Vettel, Alonso and Lewis; no one else. They´ve been doing very well for a good period of time, that´s a current top driver for me, and that´s why Robert never was in my view. Kimi hasn´t done enough to get back up there, he´s been performing on their level, just not long enough yet in my view.

Must remind you we were arguing about his "lack of adaptability". That´s where you have to look at his full career to judge. One quick overview and that tag falls apart.

What stopped him from whipping Heidfeld in 2 of their 3 years together then? No top team was even interested in Kubica after his average performance in 2009 (one McLaren seat, one Red Bull seat, two Mercedes seats).

Surely off topic

Why don't you address the question in the topic instead of childishly lashing out?

Actually 2012 Schumacher is again top driver 2011 and 2010 wasn't...but this year he has been very good most of the times, not as good as earlier in his career but very good.

IMO he can't be considered top driver after his Barcelona and Hungary performances

Actually I do agree Kimi is not a top driver right now -even if he is easily that career wise-, if that´s what you´re implying. That´s Vettel, Alonso and Lewis; no one else. They´ve been doing very well for a good period of time, that´s a current top driver for me, and that´s why Robert never was in my view. Kimi hasn´t done enough to get back up there, he´s been performing on their level, just not long enough yet in my view.

Must remind you we were arguing about his "lack of adaptability". That´s where you have to look at his full career to judge. One quick overview and that tag falls apart.

And that's where we disagree. And I didn't say anything about Kimi's adaptability.

Yes. Piquet had been running top 10 all day, and was in 7th with 3 laps to go.Kimi, although a valiant effort, qualified 31st and barely ran in the top 20 all day.

If I remember correctly, Kimi was blown away at the fact these guys run 3 practice sessions, a Quali session and the race on the same day!Was a good race. I was cheering for him to crack the top 15.Here's a vid.Last 3 laps.

oh, wow. Seeing Raikkonen's name crawl across the top of the screen gave me shivers. To think what could have been. 15th in his first start. Pretty good.

Of course he should have won, there is nothing wrong for that. But is he guilty that Hungaroring is a track where you can't overtake?Kimi is a honest guy, he always admits his mistakes. But Hamilton has history of making lies, why would he blame his talent for Bahrain fiasco? It's easier to downplay the car. Once more time, Button is not a yard stick, I really don't rate him that high. Grosjean on pure pace would similarly dominate him.

The thing is, you put your car on pole by more than 0.5 second. And then you lose about 1 second of that pace in the race. Going by your logic, that must be on drivers shoulders, because they can't put the tyres into right operating window in the race.

The article is from before Hungary.

Well considering he only lost one position on track, and the rest in the pit stops means we don't have to take his word for it.

I don't think Grosjean would, just because he's able to outpace 'the fastest man in F1' Kimi, who lost to Massa, has spent 2 years out of F1 and can hardly string a decent qualifying lap together doesn't mean in anyway he would dominate Button on pure pace.

As for your last line, Vettel who qualified on pole in Valencia and then seemingly dominated the race until his retirement is a good counter.

I don't think Grosjean would, just because he's able to outpace 'the fastest man in F1' Kimi, who lost to Massa, has spent 2 years out of F1 and can hardly string a decent qualifying lap together doesn't mean in anyway he would dominate Button on pure pace.

Now Button is suddenly doing a better job than Räikkönen this year. Cool story, bro

Australia because despite the poor launch controls that lost him track position at the start, and the safety car that cost him second, his World Championship winning Team mate was just better.

Malaysia because the team messed up two pit stops putting him behind both Alonso and Perez and it was all he could do with a car poor in wet conditions to maintain the gap to Alonso.

Anyway stop trying to deflect the main issue.

Which is whether the car is being fully utilised?

The fact is you have two drivers coming back from 2 years out, and one has yet to get up to speed, while the other is a rookie, who has outqualified the former?

Are there performances representative of their cars pace?

IMO no.

Poor launch control? Give me a break. It's the same car for his teammate who went on to win the race with the same launch control, blah blah..

You know for sure Raikkonen is yet to get up to speed? Is it some universal truth that a 2-year back automatically makes you 0.2s/lap slower? What F1 text book is this in? Just randomly making up as you go along - if it is Hamilton one type of explanation, if it is Raikkonen a different type of Hamilton. Great to read!

maybe I remember it totally wrong -but wasn't that Ferrari 2009 a total piece of s**t, ecpecially in the beginning of the season????So I think It's a bit unfair to put the blame on Kimi...But maybe I got it totally wrong...

maybe I remember it totally wrong -but wasn't that Ferrari 2009 a total piece of s**t, ecpecially in the beginning of the season????So I think It's a bit unfair to put the blame on Kimi...But maybe I got it totally wrong...

No, you are right. It's a bit unfair. But then again Ferrari was much better car

Well considering he only lost one position on track, and the rest in the pit stops means we don't have to take his word for it.

I don't think Grosjean would, just because he's able to outpace 'the fastest man in F1' Kimi, who lost to Massa, has spent 2 years out of F1 and can hardly string a decent qualifying lap together doesn't mean in anyway he would dominate Button on pure pace.

As for your last line, Vettel who qualified on pole in Valencia and then seemingly dominated the race until his retirement is a good counter.

Exactly Vettel dominated. And that's the difference between him and Hamilton. Hamilton couldn't turn on his tyres in the race. In qualifying he's godlike, but race not so much.

And Kimi didn't lose because of pitstops? Lotus pitstops are slowest of all top teams.

Hamilton has an advantage that Button is nowhere. That's why he can blame the car. Put Kimi there and we would have some other situation.

As for Massa and Kimi, yes he beat Kimi on points, but on pure pace in race was he faster? Your holy opinion?

Poor launch control? Give me a break. It's the same car for his teammate who went on to win the race with the same launch control, blah blah..

You know for sure Raikkonen is yet to get up to speed? Is it some universal truth that a 2-year back automatically makes you 0.2s/lap slower? What F1 text book is this in? Just randomly making up as you go along - if it is Hamilton one type of explanation, if it is Raikkonen a different type of Hamilton. Great to read!

Why do you assume their the same launch controls? Car's with different set-ups, on different side of the tracks with different variables ect

Hamilton specifically said that the team changed his launch controls on the parade lap, despite already getting a good start with the previous ones, however you seem to be an expert on what they are so I'd love your detailed explanations as to how they work, and why, using your F1 engineer knowledge, two drivers would have the same launch controls.

I don't know for sure if Raikkonen has lost performance its an opinion, but i'd expect anyone who's been out for 2 years not to be fully up to scratch and to be making progress, espeically on different tyres and a completely different car. I'm sure he's capable of adapting (if he has the right steering) but he's not going to at his best especially when compared to drivers who have been driving without pause in the current regs. I do find your last hilarious in the light of your first.

Exactly Vettel dominated. And that's the difference between him and Hamilton. Hamilton couldn't turn on his tyres in the race. In qualifying he's godlike, but race not so much.

And Kimi didn't lose because of pitstops? Lotus pitstops are slowest of all top teams.

Hamilton has an advantage that Button is nowhere. That's why he can blame the car. Put Kimi there and we would have some other situation.

As for Massa and Kimi, yes he beat Kimi on points, but on pure pace in race was he faster? Your holy opinion?

That's because race pace is dependent on tyre wear and as I've pointed out both Red Bull and Lotus have an inherent advantage in that area over McLaren and Mercedes.

Kimi may have been adversely affect by pit stops but the biggest reason for him not winning so far has been his lack of qualifying pace.

Lol to your last line, the same Kimi who couldn't adapt to a change in suspension or can't adapt to a different form of power steering would be able to manage the Mclaren's very narrow operating range like Hamilton has done? OK although I would stress that it has been Lewis' qualifying performances that have enabled him to do so well in spite of the McLaren's weaknesses. Considering Kimi has struggled so much to put a clean qualifying session together I don't know how much I could take your claim seriously.

That's because race pace is dependent on tyre wear and as I've pointed out both Red Bull and Lotus have an inherent advantage in that area over McLaren and Mercedes.

Kimi may have been adversely affect by pit stops but the biggest reason for him not winning so far has been his lack of qualifying pace.

Lol to your last line, the same Kimi who couldn't adapt to a change in suspension or can't adapt to a different form of power steering would be able to manage the Mclaren's very narrow operating range like Hamilton has done? OK although I would stress that it has been Lewis' qualifying performances that have enabled him to do so well in spite of the McLaren's weaknesses. Considering Kimi has struggled so much to put a clean qualifying session together I don't know how much I could take your claim seriously.

Race pace dependant on tyre wear? I agree, but then McLaren had inherent advantage then in qualifying, so on that basis you can't blame Kimi for not starting on the front row. The thing is, it's very possible that Hamilton can't adapt to tyres in race yet. I know it tyre wear depends of car characheristics, but it's mostly down to drivers. If you can't put your tyres into right operating window then they're going to degrade a lot faster than normal.

Second point:Yes, it can also be said for Hamilton. Altough he was affected by pitstops, surely, the biggest reason for him not winning a lot more so far has been his lack of race pace.

Kimi is driving 10 years in F1, and only in one year he had problems with adapting(and who knows what happened here, it's enough just to change a little tyre pressures and suddenly driver is nowhere.) But being in McLaren for five years, he never had troubles adapting to anything. Have you ever wondered if it's not McLaren's narrow operating range, instead it's narrow operating of Hamilton? I would also stress that it has been Kimi's race performances that enabled to do so well in spite of the Lotus's weaknesses.

Race pace dependant on tyre wear? I agree, but then McLaren had inherent advantage then in qualifying, so on that basis you can't blame Kimi for not starting on the front row. The thing is, it's very possible that Hamilton can't adapt to tyres in race yet. I know it tyre wear depends of car characheristics, but it's mostly down to drivers. If you can't put your tyres into right operating window then they're going to degrade a lot faster than normal.

Second point:Yes, it can also be said for Hamilton. Altough he was affected by pitstops, surely, the biggest reason for him not winning a lot more so far has been his lack of race pace.

Kimi is driving 10 years in F1, and only in one year he had problems with adapting(and who knows what happened here, it's enough just to change a little tyre pressures and suddenly driver is nowhere.) But being in McLaren for five years, he never had troubles adapting to anything. Have you ever wondered if it's not McLaren's narrow operating range, instead it's narrow operating of Hamilton? I would also stress that it has been Kimi's race performances that enabled to do so well in spite of the Lotus's weaknesses.

Yes I can blame Kimi, Romain has shown that even in the first race of the season the Lotus in the hands of a rookie was good enough to qualify third, and in Hungary he looked very fast until he went slower in Q3 than he did in Q2. The fact is he's been unable to perform in qualifying, and you attempts to place the blame on the car are overturned by his rookie team mate's performance in the same car.

If you think Hamilton can't adapt to the tyres you should rewatch Barcelona where he was the only driver to pull of a two stop, and the fact that he appears to manage the tyres better than his WDC team mate who is known for being smooth and looking after his tyres, he even spoke abouut changing his style in the race and inducing understeer to make the tyres last. I'll say it again, the characteristics of the engine affect tyre wear and the Renault with its cutting of cylinders has an advantage of the Mercedes engine powered cars in that area.

No actually its been factors outside of his control, such as being disqualified from pole because his team didn't put in enough fuel (just read my sig for the rest), the only times I've really seen the McLaren struggle for pace is at Bahrain, Monaco, and Valencia which are all tracks that highlight the McLaren's weakness in slow corners and on traction.

Hamilton a narrow operating range? Do you have an evidence to support such a theory particularly because he's a driver Alonso has acknowledged as being able to get the maximum and more than the maximum out of the car.